Middle East Would Be More Stable if Iran Had Nukes

pushing whatever they find to be advantageous.

The thing that I'm saying was, of course,

that America's actions in the region,

including aiding and abetting not only the Taliban,

but also the Mujahideen and some instances,

some of the factions that broke off and created al-Qaeda,

ended up engaging in blowback

for the consistency stabilization in the region.

This is a position that actually, I believe,

I was looking at the polls all the way back in 2001,

had 66% approval, that America in some way, shape or form,

was responsible for 9/11.

What poll was this?

Which is, actually, I'm gonna pull it up real quick.

'Cause I found it to be fascinating.

I was recently going back to see like,

what was the attitude even back then?

Hold on, I might have actually presented it more favorable

than it actually is, but I wanna quickly pull it up for you.

It's a very old poll, and I was shocked by it, too,

so I think it's fascinating.

US wrongdoing might have motivated 9/11 attacks.

In 2001, 33% of all Americans said that US wrongdoing

might have motivated 9/11 attacks, 2002,

by 2002, it was 38%, 2004, it was 38%.

And amongst them--

What poll was this?

30%, the poll comes from Pew Research.

Okay, but that's less than 66.

Yeah, yeah, I was wrong.

It was what I was looking at was

fully two-thirds of liberal Democrats.

Got it.

That said that, 67%.

Having said that, of course,

there is public approval, and then there is the truth.

And not only do I believe that this was the truth,

it's a well-established academic concept.

CIA has also talked about it as well,

but Robert Kagan, the godfather of neocons,

recently wrote for the Brookings Institute about how,

yes, of course, our meddling in the affairs

of the Middle East is what inevitably caused 9/11.

So, blowback, would that include US support for Israel,

military bases throughout the Middle East?

You know, U.S. oil policies.

Absolutely.

This doesn't justify the action, mind you.

This is more so analysis to stop further violence

from taking place, both violence in the region,

but also violence in the home front as well.

The reason I bring up those things is because

those are specifically cited by a song of Bin Laden

as justification for, and I guess my question is--

And also our, you know, our civil liberties.

Well, did Bin Laden have a point?

No, I think that the action was so heinous and so violent

that, and also given his position as formerly,

an American ally, as I believe it was a telegraph

that called the brave warrior fighting against the USSR

to throw a path of peace in Afghanistan.

I think that he came across a little bit more

as a spoiled brat that wasn't getting his way

with many backers in the Saudi kingdom as well

in the royal family.

Bin Laden, me, he wrote in that letter, you know,

which as you know, has sort of had a second life

among some in the left wing.

Yeah.

That, you know, Americans would be irrational,

not to expect, to, irrational to expect to live in peace

and prosperity after, you know,

over half a century of meddling in the Middle East.

Isn't that the definition of blowback?

Yeah, it is.

It is the definition of blowback.

And I want less actors, like Osama Bin Laden,

to exist in general.

There's two schools of thought on this.

One is obviously to, you know, kill as many people

in the region as possible with the hopes

that we can squash any kind of resistance whatsoever.

And the other path of least resistance

is to not interfere in these affairs in general

and not continue to dominate and create an environment

where people are going to seek out revenge

and put us in a position of danger.

It's just what's the difference between deserved

and blowback?

Yeah.

I think the difference between deserved and blowback

is the justification.

Say blowback is not, blowback is not a justification.

Blowback is just what it is.

A justification offers a, either a moral condemnation

or a moral acceptance of the act.

I do not accept the act of 9/11 morally.

I believe that it was a horrifying tragedy.

Also talking, you know, to keep on the Middle East a little bit.

The Trump administration has used the fact of,

we can't let Iran have a nuclear weapon

as justification for this war.

Do you think Iran should be free to build a nuclear weapon?

I think Iran, much like any other sovereign nation,

has a right to defend itself,

regardless of its domestic policies.

My opinion on the matter is not dissimilar

to what John Mersheimer has said,

which is that in order to create regional stability

in a world where mutually assured destruction

is the only way for countries to have sovereignty.

It's the same principle that I apply to Ukraine as well.

Countries that would have nuclear arms

in an age of nuclear proliferation

are the only countries that can generate true sovereignty.

Now, having said that, do I want Iran to have nuclear arms?

No, but I also don't want America or Russia or China

to have nuclear arms either.

Do you think the Middle East would be more stable

if Iran had a nuclear weapon?

I believe yes.

I think that the Middle East would be more stable.

Having said that, once again, I'm not advocating.

I'm not trying to, you know, send Iran

enriched nuclear uranium, nuclear grade enriched uranium.

But with respect to Iran,

I think the nuclear conversation is a distraction.

Time and time again, they have shown the Iranian government,

regardless of whether you want to trust them or not,

you can just look at their actions,

have proven that they are utilizing the conversation

of enriched uranium as a point of leverage

to bring America back to the table to get sanctions relief.

And we had a successful deal in play with the JCPOA

under the Obama leadership.

It was very controversial.

It was not only critically panned by the entirety of the right,

but also even Democrats, including Chuck Schumer,

were very critical of this deal.

And yet, it was probably Obama's signature foreign policy

accomplishment.

And it unfortunately took us a decade,

or two decades, to come to that recognition,

to come to terms with that reality.

But I think that that deal alone,

this, you know, multi-year, multilateral deal

that actually brought in China and Russia,

as well as European partners,

the International Atomic Energy Agency,

had shown that Iran was willing to engage in diplomacy

with the West.

- One last thing on the Middle East and on this topic,

at least.

You once said that America is the top dog in terrorism.

- Yes.

- Do you think America then is worse than al Qaeda?

- Pound for pound, as far as the number of deaths.

Yes, we have caused tremendous terror all around the world.

I think that that is not only terror that we are waging

on regular civilians in nations in the periphery,

but it's also having consequences on ourselves.

It's having dramatic consequences on the home front.

One clear example of this is what we did in Minna, right?

There's no distinction between blowing up a school,

triple tapping it with Tomahawk missiles.

If you're killing 140 school girls,

that is an act of terror.

This doesn't mean that all Americans are terrorists,

but the reality of the matter is we have to create

an environment of accountability to ensure things

like that never happen again.

If we want to seek out and punish those who terrorize us,

like al Qaeda, sometimes we aid in a bet al Qaeda,

when we find them to be a reliable ally in places

like Yemen, for example.

But if we understandably want to seek out

and punish terrorist entities like al Qaeda,

we should also hold ourselves to a similar standard.

If not a higher standard.

You said not all Americans are terrorists.

And it's insinuating that some are.

I think if you are doing terrorism,

then yes, you are a terrorist.

This is a loaded term at the end of the day.

It's a vague term, and I'm not deploying it

in the way that the American State Department

utilizes it, which is a utilization of the term terrorism

with the express purpose of denying habeas corpus.

I think everyone needs to have their day in court,

no matter how vile or heinous they might seem.

Having said that, like I keep repeating over and over again,

I think it's important to create accountability

to make sure that we do not repeat these mistakes,

not only because it creates an environment of blowback,

but also because there's a finite amount of time

and energy that we have, right?

If we're using all of our productive output,

all of our resources on waging wars overseas

for profit and plunder,

we're not using those resources on ourselves.

We're not using it on building schools.

We're not using these resources on fixing the pothole,

something as simple as that.

And we're losing our competitive edge around the globe.

I'm an American citizen.

I talk about how frustrated I am with this country.

I even say, God, I hate this country sometimes.

Having said that, if I truly hated this country,

one, I'd probably be a Republican, let's be real,

because I think they're destroying this country.

Or I would just leave.

There's a reason why I stay here.

There's a reason why I keep advocating

for the things that I'm advocating for,

because I truly believe in the promise of America.

I believe in the goodness of my neighbors.

I believe in the goodness of American citizens.

And I know that people of good conscious

can see right from wrong.

And a lot of people are frustrated

because they're not seeing the changes

and that develops, that breeds apathy.

I want to fight back against that.

And I want Americans to take control

over the reins once again.

(upbeat music)

- I'm shifting topics, Charlie Kirk.

You had known him for a long time.

- Yeah.

- After he was killed, you called it fucking devastating.

You know, it's a horrifying thing you've ever seen

and pure horror.

But months later, you started sarcastically

singing the song, "We Are Charlie Kirk."

You sang it live last month on tour

and later explained, "It's not my fault.

The song is a banger."

- Yes.

- You told your followers when he was killed

to stop making jokes.

- Yeah.

- But then why did you start?

- Great question.

The hagiography of Charlie Kirk was

and the forced reverence coming from

not only the Republican Party,

but like the government in general.

And even some members of the liberal intelligentsia

was the reason why there was so much pushback.

And even the "We Are Charlie Kirk" song itself

is a way to, it was an attempt by a Republican,

who was a fan of Charlie Kirk, to honor his legacy.

While Charlie Kirk, the actions that took place,

the assassination of Charlie Kirk is a heinous crime

and completely unjustifiable,

I very quickly also talked about my disagreements

with Charlie Kirk.

And there were plenty of people,

plenty regular citizens who were doing that as well.

There were people that--

- I'm not pushing back.

- No, no, no, no, no, but it's important

because this is a big part of why this backlash.

Or rather, this is a big part of why people

took this not as seriously.

The argument isn't, oh, these people are elated

at the fact that Charlie Kirk.